It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Monday, March 07, 2022
Robert Reich: Four Things You Can Do For Ukraine – OpEd
The waitperson where I had breakfast this morning broke down in tears over Ukraine. “I just don’t know what to do,” she said.
She’s not alone. I feel the same way. You probably do, too.
That one tyrant can cause this much human suffering defies whatever progress we assumed civilization had made since Hitler’s rise almost a century ago. That Putin can wreak such havoc on innocent people, seemingly unconstrained by others in Russia’s government, makes a mockery of modern ideas about governance in even totalitarian regimes.
That he has control over a nuclear stockpile capable of annihilating much of humanity lays bare — even more starkly than does climate change — how far humanity has fallen behind in the primal race between technology and survival.
But bear in mind several encouraging things. The rich nations of the world that still practice democracy are exercising a unity of resolve not seen in decades. Thankfully as well, we in the United States have as president a person who is sane, thoughtful, experienced, and even-tempered. Can you imagine where we’d be with the former guy?
Beyond this, there is no reason to suppose that the grim calculus behind “mutually-assured destruction,” which has so far prevented a nuclear holocaust, has changed.
Finally, by all accounts Putin is not having an easy time of it. The people of Ukraine are mounting a fierce resistance. He cannot “win” this war. Even if he establishes a puppet government there, the resistance will continue.
So what can you do to help Ukraine? Four things.
1. First, you can contribute to Ukrainian relief efforts. Here are organizations I trust:
— Ukraine Crisis Fund. The international humanitarian group is providing food, water and other items to families fleeing violence in Ukraine. Contribute here.
— Doctors without Borders. Staffers with the medical relief organization remain in Ukraine and are “seeking ways to respond to the medical and humanitarian needs as the conflict evolves.” Offer support here.
— ICRC. The Swiss-based organization is supporting the work of the Ukrainian Red Cross in helping those impacted by the war. Donate to the ICRC.
— Keep Ukraine’s Media Going is a GoFundMe campaign for journalists around Ukraine that also aims to help reporters relocate and continue their work from neighboring countries. Donations can be made here.
2. Second, you can write your members of Congress expressing your view that the United States should sanction Russian oil and gas, and that you are willing to make the financial sacrifice of higher prices at gas pumps and for home heating oil that will almost certainly result.
3. Third, you can urge your members of Congress to open wide America’s borders to Ukrainians fleeing Putin’s war, and help them transport themselves and their families here.
4. Fourth and finally, whatever your political persuasion, you can put aside your anger and frustration with Americans who disagree with you on other issues and recognize our shared commitment to democracy and human rights and our mutual loathing for the murderous rampage we are witnessing in Ukraine. Bearing witness to this calamity and unambiguously condemning it should, at the very least, be something we can all agree on.
Robert B. Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies, and writes at robertreich.substack.com. Reich served as Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. He has written fifteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock", "The Work of Nations," and"Beyond Outrage," and, his most recent, "The Common Good," which is available in bookstores now. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine, chairman of Common Cause, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and co-creator of the award-winning documentary, "Inequality For All." He's co-creator of the Netflix original documentary "Saving Capitalism," which is streaming now.
The China-Australia Laser Incident: More Than Meets The Eye – Analysis
Australia accused a Chinese warship of shining a military grade laser at an Australian Air Force Poseidon 8A (P-8A) surveillance plane. The incident occurred on 17 February in Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and also involved the dropping of sonobuoys by the Australian aircraft. Australian politicians quickly seized the opportunity to blast China and bolster their standing in the upcoming elections. Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the incident was an “act of intimidation.” Defense Minister Peter Dutton said Australia “would always stand up to China’s coercion, bullying and intimidation”. But politics aside, there is much more to this incident than meets the eye.
The Australian Department of Defense condemned China’s “unprofessional and unsafe military conduct.” This position has been backed by several Australian analysts including former RAAF Group Captain Peter Layton. He authored a piece in the prominent Lowy Institute’s Interpreter alleging that China’s use of a military-grade laser was a purposeful hostile act of aggression “authorized at the highest levels.” The piece further asserted that “trying to injure people appears on its way to being the new Chinese grey zone norm”. These dangerous assertions are speculation based on questionable assumptions. The incident and explanations thereof raise many questions and deserve closer examination.
First, it is not clear what type of laser was fired at the plane. The Layton piece said that it was part of a fire control system. But others said it was a “dazzler designed to temporarily blind adversaries or burn sensors.” The Layton piece alleges that such use “appears to be in contravention of the 1995 Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons”. Both Australia and China are parties to that Protocol.
Core questions are what type of laser was used, what was the intent of firing the laser, and what was its effect?
The Protocol stipulates that “laser weapons specifically designed_ _to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision are prohibited.” But it also states that “blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems is not covered by the Protocol. So was the laser aimed directly at– and only at– the cockpit, with the intention to blind the pilots or damage critical electronic equipment? Or was it aimed at the plane as a whole as a range finder? Did it blind or injure the pilots, or were they wearing protective eyeware? To be sure, firing a laser at an aircraft is a n unfriendly act. But if the laser was not designed to injure, and there was no intent to cause harm and there was none, the Protocol may not have been violated.
Second, why did the Chinese warship fire a laser at the plane? Was this a response to a hostile act on the part of the aircraft? The US produced P8As are armed with torpedoes, Harpoon anti-ship missiles and other weapons. Did the Chinese commander consider its approach ‘unsafe’, harassment, or a hostile ‘provocation’? If so, was the action justified?
The Australian Defense Force had been tracking the surface vessels for days. If there was thought to be a submarine in the vicinity, was the P-8A subhunter trying to identify it and collect its ‘signature’ to pass on to the Americans. If so, was it reasonable for China to view this act as hostile or at the least ‘unfriendly’?
The Layton piece claims that the use of the laser was unprovoked because the Australian subhunter dropped the sonobuoys in the vicinity of the Chinese warships only after the firing of the laser. If –as the piece says– the laser was fired before the P-8A dropped the sonobuoys, their deployment could have been seen as retaliation and a ‘hostile act’.
Both Australia and China have agreed to the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES). It recommends “avoiding the discharge of objects in the direction of vessels encountered”. Did the aircraft’s dropping of sonobuoys near the vessels go against this recommendation?
The Chinese vessels were exercising their UN Convention on the Law of the Sea supported right of freedom of navigation on the high seas. Yes they were in the Australian EEZ and this may have added an element of knee-jerk nationalism to the Australian reaction. But as the U.S. never tires of pointing out, EEZs are “international” waters for purposes of navigation by warships.
There are many questions that need to be answered before jumping to conclusions and assigning blame. Indeed, there may be enough to go around.
Mark J. Valencia
Mark J. Valencia, is an internationally known maritime policy analyst, political commentator and consultant focused on Asia. He is the author or editor of some 15 books and more than 100 peer-reviewed journal articles. He is currently an Adjunct Senior Scholar, National Institute for South China Sea Studies, Haikou, China
COVID-19 is biological warfare against prisoners
One in every five state and federal prisoners in the United States has tested positive for the coronavirus, a rate more than four times as high as the general population – 1,700 loved ones have died. In some states, more than half of prisoners have been infected, according to data collected by The Associated Press and The Marshall Project. Stop experimenting and start releasing!
Part 2 of Herd Immunity
by Cheryl Vaughn, California Institute for Women (CIW)
Editor’s note: We continue with our JPay correspondence from Cheryl Vaughn, W93852, who sounds like an activist, but is a woman sharing her grave concerns about the plight of women prisoners being treated inhumanely at CIW – same as many of us might do sitting around our kitchen tables sharing our thoughts on the state of the world – feeling she has little to no agency over her ability to change her circumstances, other than having hope, saying prayers and risking retaliation for exposing current prison conditions at CIW to the public.
Jan. 5, 2022 (excerpt)
We are in Phase 1 again. Deja Vu. They seem dead set on not letting people go.
Then they got the nerve to speak harshly: “Go to your cells! Close your doors!” Then you hear a woman’s voice loudly over their radio snippy and shouting harshly: “No inmates are to be showering or using phones, they don’t get to be out!!” They love locking us down, yelling, talking down to us like we’re bad dogs or something.
Those compaction moves were bound to contribute to this current environment of Covid positives. How utterly cruel, murderous even. They would rather watch us die or suffer, than let people go or do any of the right, moral and ethically sound things humans do if they have a responsibility over the lives of others.
With power comes responsibility. But this treatment is utterly criminal – no better than what many of us are accused of doing or have done. In some ways it’s worse, because it’s genocide.
Here’s the coldest part of it – the warden is a woman of color. A Black woman! How could she?!
Jan. 8, 2022
Dear Nube Brown,
I hope this letter finds you all doing well, staying safe out there. We here at CIW are trying to maintain our mental and physical health.
We were issued one N95 mask each about three days ago. However, we are expected to wear them when we come out of our cells per one of the housing lieutenants. But we were wondering, how often should we get a new one? Generally, officers have them, but rarely do we ever get them unless we are on a transport out of the prison. If we are going to be on this statewide 15-day quarantine, shouldn’t we get one a day, at least, of the N95 mask?
snippy and shouting harshly: “No inmates are to be showering or using phones, they don’t get to be out!!”
Aside from the quarantine we are already on because we have positives in our housing unit here in Emmons A and Emmons B, the staff is not telling us who is or isn’t positive; something they never should have been doing in the first place because it was causing people added stress and shame for everyone to know they were specifically on quarantine with the sign on their cell doors, and everyone would blame them because the quarantines would cut short the programming time of everyone in the unit.
Another thing I question is, should the porters (inmate workers) be the ones controlling the bleach, holding on to it, not allowing other inmates access to it themselves, etc.? We have one very, very bossy inmate worker who wants to tell others what to do so badly, policing other inmates especially since they pick on certain ones and overlook their buddies.
Inmate workers are out of their cells while the rest of the population is locked down. They began to address other inmates in a superior tone and tell the COs how they want to run things. The staff are so short that they are allowing this behavior because they need the help, I guess.
It’s very bad policy – inmates should never be put in a position to police other inmates. Morally speaking, they should not even want to, but apparently the incarcerated workers don’t recognize the damage of allowing themselves to be used by the system like this. They don’t get all the PPE gear that staff does, so why even be used like that?
Sincerely, Inmate Cheryl Vaughn W93852
Jan. 14, 2022
Hi, Nube. It’s me, Cheryl, from CIW.
Food insecurity is becoming a feature of prison now, and it doesn’t seem to be letting up any time soon. The pandemic has a lot to do with this.
Schools are facing this same problem. But why should CDCR take funding from schools and other vital services just to keep prisons open and prison guards employed? Certainly, if schools are facing food shortages because of supply-chain crises, then the chains that supply prisons should be supplying the public schools instead.
It’s very bad policy – inmates should never be put in a position to police other inmates.
However, if that happens, prisoners will come up short. It then becomes unjust detention when captors cannot supply inmates with the proper amounts of nutritional, at least somewhat palatable, food to sustain each person on a daily basis. We are already beginning to see food insecurities here in CIW.
We really need to start on a true campaign of vigorous prison closures in California. Too much money is being taken from other needy programs for prisons. The detention in California is already reaching a level where it has become unjust detention.
Covid is continually scourging inmates and staff. We drink unsafe water. Our dilapidated buildings and plumbing are fit for demolition; These old buildings are full of asbestos. We receive substandard medical care, there’s overcrowding of inmates and we’re too close together – then we get another surge of positive Covid cases.
The huge shortages of staff are due to the pandemic. These unsafe conditions abound in California prisons. Conditions were already bad for prisoners, and sometimes even staff, but mostly since Covid, they are unbearable.
Critical times, hard to deal with, heading toward tribulations – the cycles of abuse seem never ending with no sign of letup. There is no more possibility of reform – the California prison system is broken beyond any hopes of repair.
Truthfully, the people should close all except the very few highest-level prisons for serial killers and rapists and child molesters – although even a few people in some of those categories may possibly be reformed – but the California prison system itself is way out of control and beyond reform.
The Department of Agriculture pledged in the week of Dec. 17, 2021, to send up to $1.5 billion to states and school districts to help fortify the nation’s school-meal program. The funds, which the USDA says it hopes to make available in January of 2022, are intended to help schools deal with disruptions brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. The bulk of the funds is expected to flow to as many as 100,000 schools in all 50 states.
Last time that I checked, no other state’s prison guards are as well funded as California’s.
Sounds nice, but how many times has the bulk of funding allocated for public programs, even schools, ended up in police coffers and prison personnel pockets instead? Besides, the funding the police organizations hijack isn’t going toward the inmates, but for salaries, raises, medical care and dental coverage, and so many other perks and benefits for prison employees and their families.
The nepotism in hiring for some of these prisons in California is so blatant and rampant that several generations of one family can be employed in one prison alone. A lot of that happens right here at CIW. Perhaps there are rules against this practice, but no one seems to be enforcing those rules.
Funding also goes for more employee vehicles and weapons to use against inmates. Not even New York’s correctional peace officers union have it as well as the California Correctional Peace Officers Association. Last time that I checked, no other state’s prison guards are as well funded as California’s.
This comes at the cost of taking money that should be for firefighters, teachers, medical personnel in public hospitals – not just jail or prison infirmaries, where it’s well-known that medical care for incarcerated people is substandard, and medical personnel in carceral institutions usually lack proper credentials and training for treating inmate-patients.
These monies should also be for homeless shelters and senior centers and animal shelters, the improvement of public-school grounds and equipment and more after-school programs, etc. [These monies should be for] the community – really put funds into the hands of the community instead of criminalizing almost everyone in the community besides a select few.
The inhumane treatment of incarcerated people is not considered criminal, but protesting such treatment is criminalized.
Please stop the school to prison pipeline which is set to churn out more slaves for the Prison Industrial Complex (PIC) – brainwashing men, women, children, everyone, into believing we are all chattel once we are incarcerated.
The PIC is also having us believe that speaking out against being treated as such makes us rebels, outlaws and criminals. Oh, People, stop funding this diabolical system.
Now, here’s the cold part, where it gets tricky: The inhumane treatment of incarcerated people is not considered criminal, but protesting such treatment is criminalized. Framing trouble by decree like the 13th Amendment did and still does to this day, hundreds of years later, after the Civil War, there’s a modern-day slave class – prisoners.
Sincerely, Cheryl Vaughn
Jan. 16, 2022
Hi Nube, it’s me Cheryl from CIW. Today is Sunday Jan. 16, 2022.
My e-mails of course are all monitored closely as my regular snail mail is.
I do worry that as a result, I can expect retaliation, though. But I know that’s going to happen anyway as soon as this state quarantine is over – I have been hearing rumblings of, “Oh yeah, come February” from a CO.
Officials may transfer me to some worse prison or put me in a cell with some bully or known thief. An officer has already “jokingly” threatened me to do something like that. He is the same one that keeps clapping his hands in my presence talking about, “come February.” I guess that’s when we are expected to get out of quarantine. The staff have also said things that let me know they have been reading my mail, so it’s too late for me to clam-up now.
As I write this, I was just told I am getting a bunky again, one who came from off the bus. Double-celled again. They are filling us up again right now. It’s so bogus how staff on second and third watch shifts make the safety COVID announcements daily about social distancing, then turn around and place us with bunkies like there’s a revolving door to each cell.
Also, I dared to question the reasoning behind CIW – or any prison in California – having the same person as warden, or even acting warden, who was the warden at CIM who allowed the transfer of 122 inmates from CIM (California Institute for Men) to San Quentin on May 30, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic.
a real surge in positive Covid cases throughout the prison – why would the warden do such a careless thing at this time?
Right now, some of the same officials responsible are working here at CIW, despite so many deaths caused by their carelessness. What’s worse is, during this Omicron variant, this ex-CIM official who now works here at CIW, has made many compaction moves double bunking almost all of us once again, even though doing so may be a violation of the treatment of prisoners under the United Nations’ Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela rules), and the standards defined by the American Correctional Association (ACA). The cells are tinier than the bathrooms in most homes.
The compaction moves here at CIW have caused so much stress and mental anguish. The main thing to happen since these moves has been a real surge in positive Covid cases throughout the prison. Why would the warden do such a careless thing at this time?
Is this part of some scheme to test out the power of the vaccinations against COVID or what?! We were already secretly used as Guinea pigs by officials during the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in prisons throughout the U.S., in an attempt to establish herd immunity during the Trump administration. Crimes against humanity is what it looks like from where I sit.
I don’t know what’s up their sleeves, but I can only imagine. Naturally, being a lifer who has never gone to Board, even after 22 years of incarceration, I am sure I can expect to pay dearly for expressing myself at Board.
At one point, people of color who were going to the Board were being asked if they were going to have any dealings with the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement. I cannot recall verbatim how the questions were posed, but the fact that it was even brought up during a Board hearing was intimidating. That was the way one young woman took it. I was not there in the room, so I have not seen the actual transcripts to know exactly what was said.
Fortunately, one of the people who this happened to has paroled. So, thank you Nube, by all means publish. Thank you for listening to my cries of anguish.
Sincerely, Cheryl Vaughn W93852
Jan. 26, 2022 (excerpt)
The governor is looking the other way, but these wardens must be doing this at the request of some higher official. You may find this same weirdness is happening all across the U.S., with wardens intentionally exposing inmates to this deadly virus to establish herd immunity. But in the process, they have sacrificed the lives of inmates and staff.
No one gave INFORMED CONSENT to be used this way. We are not just acceptable casualties. This affects the public, not just prisoners.
It reminds me of the Tuskegee Experiments: Black male prisoners were exposed to a venereal disease. Sure, some may have contracted it naturally, but prison staff let those men go untreated to record how the disease progressed on each “subject.” Some of the men may have died, but all really suffered needlessly, and were injured in mind and body, some permanently.
So, Covid is being used as a weapon against prisoners; I think it is like biological warfare.
Whatever those in power claim as the reason why they are allowing or even facilitating these outbreaks doesn’t matter, the results are weapons against a particular group of people – genocidal behavior of authorities against inmates, people who cannot fend for themselves.
Send our sister some love and light: Cheryl Vaughn, W93852, CIW, Emmons 403-L, 16756 Chino-Corona Rd., Corona, CA 92880.
Editor’s note: Cheryl Vaughn, like all those that speak out, are at risk of retaliation and other forms of intimidation to keep them silent or in fear. We can provide some protection and support by taking time to write to our imprisoned writers, and calling the governor with your concerns: 916-445-2841.
Our community members behind the walls should not feel alone, hopeless or separate from the struggles we face out here. Let’s stand in solidarity with our community members behind the walls in our commitment to assert our humanity and fight for what’s right.
We know that they have a very colorful history and folklore. We know that the early settlers came to America fleeing religious persecution from merry old England, (Britain is the island comprising England, Scotland and Wales.) One might say they were not having such a jolly old time.
Many of us have read or seen movies about the courageous King Arthur and his lovely wife Lady Guinevere who was in love with Sir Lancelot, a gallant knight and loyal friend of King Arthur. Human behavior is timeless. This had all the makings of a medieval love triangle.
If you were of nobility or a tax collector traveling through the forest during 14th century England, you may have had the misfortune to have made the acquaintance of that socially conscious fellow Robin Hood. Robin took from the rich and gave to the poor, sort of a medieval socialist. Why should a few people have so much, and the masses have nothing? Whether you called him friend or foe, his popularity grew as did his legend.
What would Britain be without her royalty? Undoubtedly a very pale English rose. Well, one can rest assured that there is nothing pale about British English Royalty. Her history is just as colorful as her folklore. Let us begin with the Tudors.
Henry the 8th, one of England’s very capable and ruthless monarchs, married the Spanish princess Katherine of Aragon. It was said that Henry and Katherine were quite the couple. They were very much in love. Katherine made several unsuccessful attempts to give her husband a male heir. Her inability to deliver a male heir for the throne was a fatal blow to her marriage. Well, of course there were always ambitious ladies waiting to catch the eye of the king. It’s been documented that two of Henry’s wives lost their heads over him.
This brings us to Elizabeth I, the last of the Tudor monarchs. Elizabeth, like her father, was a great monarch in her own right. Britain/England flourished under her reign. She beheaded her cousin Mary Queen of Scotts for treason.
Elizabeth was commonly referred to as “The Virgin Queen.”. Was she really a virgin? Who knows? Remember she was the daughter of Queen Anne Boleyn; her father, King Henry the 8th, had her mother decapitated. She remembered what happened to a woman when she was too trusting of a man. She thought an empty bed was fair trade for keeping her head and her throne. History has shown she did both.
Queen Elizabeth I remembered what happened to a woman when she was too trusting of a man. She thought an empty bed was fair trade for keeping her head and her throne. History has shown she did both.
What did the Queen of Talk interview reveal about the modern royals? Oprah’s interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex was highly anticipated. Millions of people tuned in curious as to what insights could be gained about the world’s most admired and longest reigning monarch. What intrigues lie behind the frozen smiles of British Royals? What whispers may now be spoken?
More tea was spilled during the interview than was spilled at the Boston Tea Party. Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle, who thinks of herself as an independent woman, has been very vocal regarding women’s rights and empowerment. Megan’s own voice was silenced. She was now unable to advocate for herself, she said. Her own life was vastly different from the public image of a fairytale princess that all is well and that she and Harry were living happily ever after. The Duchess of Sussex was a frightened young woman whose life had more in common with Cinderella, living under lock and key with extended periods of isolation.
Living under constant private and public scrutiny, as well as being dogged by the press and deprived of help, Meghan’s mental health began to rapidly decline. Death shadowed her as suicidal thoughts took up permanent residence in her mind.
Centuries ago, monarchs and people of great wealth had enormous influence over their subjects. They had the power of life and death over them. To offend or displease the monarchs may cause one’s head to roll. Today’s royals may not be capable of causing one’s head to roll, at least literally, but they clearly have influence.
The royal’s refusal to bring clarity to an incident involving Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, in which Kate was responsible, gave root to shaping her public persona as a villain. Perhaps if the royals had displayed some integrity, her reputation would not have been as damaged.
Adding insult to injury, Prince Harry’s relatives, the royal family, also called “The Firm,” conveyed to Harry, as he confided in his wife, and now to Oprah and the world, that there was concern about how dark-skinned their unborn child, who is now Archie, would be – that a child with African features would be an embarrassment to the crown.
The royal family, also called “The Firm,” conveyed to Harry, as he confided in his wife, and now to Oprah and the world, that there was concern about how dark-skinned their unborn child, who is now Archie, would be – that a child with African features would be an embarrassment to the crown.
As a White man, who is also a prince, Harry was shocked and bewildered. I am certain Harry never experienced racism that was unapologetically in his face and directed towards him. Born into the pinnacle of privilege, European royalty, one would never be a target of it. He was shocked by the reality that his life of privilege did not extend to his Black wife and yes, little Archie. We all are aware of the one drop theory. It affected Meghan and their children.
Maybe having royalty, a prince or princess with a proud, conscious awareness of his or her African heritage would be politically threatening on the world stage regarding African affairs. Or maybe they did not wish to support a modern prince whose Hebrew identity was awakened in the courts of Pharaoh.
Meghan’s White heritage didn’t afford her access to the real goodies; it got her a quick peek before the door was quickly closed and sealed. When the prince married Miss Markle, he crossed the line – or let us say he did not stay within the boundaries of his social class. He brought home a lovely young woman who was educated but still Black, and Harry turned around and married her.
The way the British royals and many of the elite looked at it, Harry married the help. Frozen smiles and public whispers were boldly unmasked. Meghan’s in-laws consolidated in typical White supremacist fashion to marginalize the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Harry, this is how it is done.
The way the British royals and many of the elite looked at it, Harry married the help. Frozen smiles and public whispers were boldly unmasked. Meghan’s in-laws consolidated in typical White supremacist fashion to marginalize the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
They completely changed the rules of the game that worked well enough until Meghan Markle came along – especially since the prince would soon be the father of a Black child or a child of color. Distance had to be placed between the lily-white British throne and all of the privileges that go along with it that shout “Whites only!” like security for your family, your children, any titles, and cutting you off financially.
If it was not for the Duke of Sussex’s inheritance that his mother left him, Harry may have been known as the pauper prince. The Duke and Duchess came face to face with the invisible but real presence of White supremacy as it thrives behind one of its greatest institutions, the British monarchy.
One day out of curiosity, I decided to check out European history and I’m sure you’ve heard the saying that “curiosity killed the cat,” and it did. Satisfaction brought it back. Those arrogant British royals are a pretty kinky lot. No, I do not mean as in Prince Andrew’s alleged kind of kinky, but in the British Black Queen Charlotte kinky. Yes, that is some kinky roots. Queen Charlotte was a light skinned, flat nosed, big lip sister.
I use kinky as a kind of synonym for Black or African. Those uppity British royals have Black, as in African, blood. They got that drop. Queen Charlotte was a direct descendant from Margarite de Castro y Sousa, a Black branch of the Portuguese royal house, according to PBS Frontline.
My imagination became fueled by the blatant disrespect the current British royals displayed to the Duke of Sussex and his wife the Duchess of Sussex because of her African heritage. If it were possible for Queen Charlotte to return for a moment, what would be her reaction? Personally, honestly, I believe she would have felt so dishonored that her African blood would be boiling.
Queen Charlotte was a light skinned, flat nosed, big lip sister. If it were possible for her to return for a moment, what would be her reaction? Personally, honestly, I believe she would have felt so dishonored that her African blood would be boiling.
Queen Charlotte, of Moorish descent, was well rooted in her kinkiness, her Blackness, and would have called them out – including Queen Elizabeth herself – and they would have been put on notice about their hypocrisy. That would have made interesting coverage.
If Her Majesty Queen Charlotte had stuck around a little longer, she would shout to the world, standing on top of Buckingham Palace, which her late husband King George III purchased for her as a family home in 1761, that not only the current British royal held a kinky past.
Remember I use kinky as a synonym for Black or African, but the entire British country is kinky rooted, meaning deeply Black. The remains of a 10,000-year-old man were discovered in a gorge in Cheddar Somerset, Britain. The man was accurately identified, possible because of the advancement of technology, by scientists who added flesh to his skeletal remains. This was accomplished by extracting his DNA.
Scanning the skull, experts were able to recreate the man with unprecedented detail. It was determined that he had dark to Black skin with wavy hair; and get this: He had blue eyes. I began this article asking, “What do we really know about the Brits?” I now know that every blue-eyed, blond-haired Brit’s origin is deeply kinky at its roots.
One more thing, we spilled a lot of tea. Let us have a cup. I am serving it with crow. Eat and drink up, Brits.
